The Sun. — London, England, 1810-11-22 00:00:00

LAID REPORT. COURT OF XING'S BENCH, Nov. 21. BISHOP OF DERRY: The- -AIoRNe 1 , -EtiErese moved this day, to make the rule absolute, whiCh had been obtained , against Messrs Jenkins, Lynch, and Haynes, Pro m prietors of ; the Cambrian newspaper. Pk . Mr. JEKYLL shewed cause ;against the rule. The t o paragraph in question, which stated that the BishOp •i had been long specul iting in trade, and was at length I put into the Gazette, appeared' in the Ciuntridn of the gilt of June. There were two grounds of &thi s', , eation,ia thepresent case,- The first was, that Jen kins was not a determined libeller, but led into mis r ;presentation merely by accident : the Second, that t helpmeet he had found out his error, he had made application to the Bishop, with every acknoWledg , mem of regret. From the mode in which' the libel gal into the paper, it was to be hoped the Court would .not think it necessary to visit the defendants with the usual strictness of punishment for libel. Jenkins had for some years past corre;ponded with a Member of the House of Commtnons, who fre- . (ineptly -sent him p iragraphs. On the Btli of June, Jenkins received a letter, containing .the statement in question, with some others. From such a source, he could not doubt the authenticity of the lamina ti6n. It was put in the paper of the gth ; rt remain ed Imcontradiatd fer nearly three weeks ; when from some paragraphs in the Bath and Chester pa- - pets, it appeared to be Without foundation. At this ti Me he had receivedno notice of any prosecution against Mini but with the ; spentaneous honesty which became a respettable and. peaceable_ man, be inserted a contradiction - of the paragraph,, with' a suitable apology. On'the 22d of September, it came to his knowledge, that an addtesS had been 'present ed to-the Bishop by the Derry Grand Jury, assuring him of their respect, arid alluding to the 'subject of the libel.. On the 22d of October, Jenkins,received a letter from Mr. Chambers, of Dublin, the Bishop's Solicitor, from which he had the first notice of the prosecution. This letter recommended it - to him to go to London, wait on the-Bishop's Solicitor there, and by throwing himself on the Ireverend Prelate's 6ernency,'ary . to avoid if possible the conseqtrences of a criminal 'action. On this, Jenkins instantly wrote Lathe-Solicitor in Loudon'; - lit not feeliog satilfied• with merely i'vritieg, he came on the third day after. to London, and waited on the Bishop. He *then stated to his Lordship, that he ger the paragraph ('pm a Member Of Parliament but in hiS return home, he recolletted 'dist in the an xictk of - the inter view, he had omitted mentioning the' Ilatll i e * of the Member. He then immediately 'went 'down to Bristol, .where :he had heard that the - IVleinherio qoestion was, and got under his baud an aanoW ledguient of his being the author. Lord Eeeaseamtotrowhereinterrupted the Learded Counsel, anti obaprved, that as the libel was traced to iti tource, would be for the discretion of the prose cutor to Copsider,.whother he would .proceed with _the pres.ent. prosecution. - The ATTOKNEY-GONeRAL said be would fake an oppottunity of stating something on that subject to their Lordships hereatter.. Lord Lord E,LLENsortov t;H on this said, that no excuse was fuinislied for the publisher, by any thing which had now come .out. The Court had .M ere l y Off ere d a suegestion to the prosecutor's discretion. Toe ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied, that all those topics would be attended to in the progress of the busitiess.* They would all have their weight in due , . . Mr. JEKYLL wished to know what his Learned Friend meant by due time ? Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL.--" I will tell my Le.,rned Friend in terms which cannot be misunder stood. Let Mr. Jenkiils suffer the rule to 1?0 - Made, absolute, and iet'judguient• go by detaglt ; let ,us know what eVident'e he'can furnish for. the detection of the author ; and it - will beinen for ui to deter mine on the propriety of pressing any judgment, of the Court against him." Mr. JEKYLL observed, that neither Lynch nor Haynes hat any . part in the literary condqot of the paper. They .had been, it was true, concerned in it for these seven years; but they only interfered in supplying - it with money.. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he could not pass by the Opportunity of animadv'erting on a statement of a newspaper, as to what he had said on theAast coming of this case before the Con rt. '• It had been printed in that paper, in capitals; that ht had said, " If a libel were copied verbatim froth one paper another,- he -(the Attorney-Get - 16'M) would' be the last•man to press for' jodgment against' the co-. pyist ; and that his opinion jiad'been sanctioned by tue Court;" In cons . v . ci.:ence of 'this pablica. i~ri, be had received letters troth. several persons, now si.aitina the sentence of --the law., , .calling on him to aetonshis own opinion, and not bring them up for judgment. ''Lord E L LENBOROLIGII said, it, was not worth while ,to refute such an ass, rtion ; and, perhaps„ d !IT 4t, tothey 7 crttieral enlarged upon the subject, the same opiition would . apnea!' in Lome paper .of the next day, with the addition, that)te had admitted it to be cone& • Tile ATTORNEY- 3ENERAL then repeated the terms (Ai which Jenkins and the, other defendants might expect clemency, Let them suffer judgrwat to. go by default. .‘Bat no stipula:ion would, be entered lilt°. The defendants were to use. their own dise, cretion 5 . and the Counsel for the "proieeution Would, be guided by all ttit4tnity consistent with justice.—,.. He Must again controvert the injurious idea, th 4 the copyist was not culpable. There was scarcely a case, in which he did not com.ider the copyist as: more profligate and wicked than the original ainhor. Lord ELLENBUROUGH said, the. publication had not yet been proved a libel. But he recolleated an application for a sin - filar rule, in the case of .a late Noble Lord, (he believed it was . Lord Loughbo-. rough),, against the printer of a paragraph, s t at i ng that his fortune had been ruined by gambling tralns- - ailions. The rule was,made.absolocc.. in that case, and - the'Court would nut I hesitate tomake the. pre rule absolute. Mr. GAitow moved fora sithilarrule atirinst thi printer of the Morning flerald, and three othe. - ; for the same libel iu the Morning Herald the 2..7th of June. Mr. ABBOT chewed cause against the rule. The paragraph had not originated - ,,with the Morn'ng -Herald. Every thing that could be done as apology :was done. A contradielion of the paragraph appear ed on the 21st of July. Mr. Aboet then read the apology, which was very toll 211 d very subtnis , ive.: This apology might not amount to an excrise, but applications of , thts kind were always made to the discretion of ~the Court ; and the Court would in its wisdom consider whether any deliberate injury was meant to the prosecutor. Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—" Why did not the, de fendant make some enquiry into the-tint!) of the re-, port before he printed it ? It would have - probably saved him the trouble of the apology ?" -The -ATTORNEY-GENERAL said; the apology had not the merit of be;ng original. It was also taken from the Cambrian. Lord ELLENBOROUGII,—" There is no excuse in. the apology; all that e,in be said, is, alter first . ca lumniating the man, they then nauseate him wi'h flattery.—The rule made absolute. Mr. DAMPIER moved to make the rule absolute against the proprietor and publisher of the ilf,orniv C/ironicle. • • Mr. JEKYLL ckclined troubling the Court, at any length, after their opiniOnhad been so fully declared; but . he must, in justice to ins clients, mention a few fatts. The paragraph in the .1./orning Chronicle was copied vertatith from the Morning Herald of the '2/th of June : it appeared in the Morning Chronicle of the 28th. On the following day, the de..endants hearing that the paragraph was unfounded,,an ample apology was inserted in their paper of the 30th of June. He (Mr. Jekyll) was aware that it ‘,4 as no excuse to say, that from the long period of the oil- . gmal reports remaining uncontradided, they iwet e led to believe it was true, and Only inserted it as,a matierot common in,telligenee. But it the Attor ney General had looked nverthe Morning Herald, he would not have thoUght that the paragraph in the Morning Chronicle contained any additional sting, for it wos.a mere copy. Mr. RAINE followed, andinade some observations. on the'shorttfess of the . time whidh intervened be L tween the offence and-the apol6gy.—The r i r l e 1114de . absolute. A 'similar application was made against the pro prietor:of:the Siatesimun: • Mr. READER. said the par3gralifi was copied from the Leeds paper.—u-liale.: - Iliade ab)oluie. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. zB. STE:Et. ZCLACEY. The 'question in this case is of great importance to the commercial world, - naniely; whether a ship, by carrying false papers, renders her policy void. it appealed by the pleadings this day, that the Penn sylvania, an' American ship, which arrived pitch and warlike stores to this country, had insitrest twin London to Russia. In the course of 'her voyage she was captured by a French privateer. and con .detnned.- She had carried simulated papers," by %t Inch it appeared, that she !Ltd cleared out of Ber gen, in Norway ; but the Judges of the enemy's Prue Court conde mne d h er, o n the groutid that the 'data in •the papers made her suspicious, and that se e had not produc , ..d a proper sea passport:" The liaderwriters resisted the policy on pretence, firSi, that the ship Lid carried simulated papers Without their- knowle and also that she bad 'not proper paperd on boat d. Mr. Serjeatit BEST contended that a ship having false papers on board; could net — prevent the assu i-eito,ftom recovering. It would strike the-Judges that every ship must have-false papers, before they could enter any port on the Continent of Europe, in order to deceive Buon'aparte's otfiCers, and con vince..them that she had not sailed from a British port-. If the ship in question had not had the pa.; pers which the - Underwriters had complained of, she haVe been condemned by the operation of the Berlin decree, she having been to England with pitch, hemp, and warlike stores. Sir William Scott,` and other witnesses from the Admiralty, had proved that no ship Could'expect to enter' the-ports oCthe Continent witheUt licens -s. The state of Europe vas altered,.and if trade-was to be carried on at all, it tiouid not be without licenses. The Learned Ser jeaut contended, at considerable length, tliat it was fmnecessafy 'for 'the assured to infOrm the under- , writers that he, int en d e d to carry s i mu l ated papers, because the state of Europe prevented any ship from sailing'withOnt them. If their Lordships decided in favour of The Underwriters, an end would, in con sequence, be put to all trade in Inture. This was a most import pt case, the l'Arst of the kind that ever came Under their. Lordships' consideration, and he was not be able to'ci:e any • case to guide them in their judgedent. It was plain that , the ship was comperled ,to carry false papers to save her from copffication. It would put an end to all commerce with the if their Lordships did nut tabli e sh the plaintiff's claim. lac Court did not give judgment. DAWSON V. THM SUBMIT'S OF LONDON. Mr. Serjeant BEST moved to set aside the nort. sun in this case, anctenter a verdid for the plaintiff. It was an aaion of tre4pass brought against the late Sheriffs of Lbridon, for taking in execution some goods itrthe possession of a 'person named Pike. •It appeared that Pike bad been put -in a public-house in IVlitte,criurt, Flee street, by Dawson, who had obtained the .Jease, and was in - fad the land lord- He also kept,a public-house in another part-of tthe.city, and .as the regulations of the city did not allow. him to hold twollicenses in the same Ward, he aliowed Pike.to take out the beer-license for the J . K4se in Mitre-court:. Pike was in other respells considered the Owner of the house, and one of his creditors seized the goods, which belonged to Davy son. ,At the trial, the Judge diretied a nonsuit, on the grotind that the tnisconclud .of the plaintiff, in sup portingthe deception, did not entitle him to recover. It was - contended,. in support of the motion, that the Court had .no au►hority.-to say that the property in LONIION Priatecl by RICHARD HARRIS, of No. 4, Martlett,court, liow-strect; and Pi bli • - , the Surf Strand, where ild.viiiiimitents, Orders tar t queitton - was not roe property of Dawson, ()muse Dawson had allowed• Pike to appear,as owner. Daw son stood in th e situation ofa man who lets a ready 'furnished house. ThepersOin in possession appeared to be the owiter, yet the Learned Seijeant said, he had never heard that, the creditor of such a person had a right to seize the property on the perukes. Sir lons MANSITIELD remained of the opinion 'be had expressed at the trial, namely, ant the plAnt , ff could not recover; but Judgds Lawrence, Heath, and Chambte• differed from this Lordship, 'and, their opinion - being in tavOur of the.plaituiff's claim, the rule was granted to enter a verdict for 661. COURT . OF ARCHES, DOCTOR'S COMMONS, NOVEMBER 21. BEAVER V. BEAVER. This was a cause of divorce, or separation from . bed,- board, and mutual cohabitation, promoted on the part of Mrs. - Beaver, against her husband, by'. reason of cruelty and adultery. On a former Court day the proceedings.were 'opened by the learned Ci-. viiians on the one side and the 'other, when the Court (Sir John Moira) observed it would recom mend the parties to endeavour to comprouni , e the ina‘ter. day the cause again came on for hear ing, and after entering into a part of the evidence, the Court was of opinion the husband ought to 13:_, dismissed from the suit, and accordingly pronOunc ed for the same. COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. t 6 SCOTCH MARRIAGES. EX PARTE, HALL IN THE MATTER OF DICKENSON. This was an 'applic a ti on on t h e part of Henry William : Holland Harriet his wife, the said Harriet being bee of t;.e daughters of the bankrupt, to be allowed to prove under the commission in the fol lowing circumstances. The tetit loner, Hall, and Miss Harriet Dickenson, being both under age, had eloped to Scotland, and had there been married, 'agreeably ,to the forms of the Scotch Chuich, without, or rather contrary to, the consents and inclinations of the fathers on both sides: On their return to England, the father of the 'bride being impressed with an idea that a nlar riage in• Scotland was illegal, and desirous'that no possible stigma should be allowed to attach to the Young couple, insisted strongly on their being again married in England:by proclamation of banns; and with all the usual solemnities:, The -father of the :bridegroom, on the other hand, was of opinion that a:Scotch marriage was completely and there f.ore objected to a repetition of 'the ceremony. • To induce 'him to 'consent to this measure, Mr. Dic kenson wrote ,to the elder Mr. Hall on the 81hDe ;'cembery is.o7, agreeing on the marriag&being again 'elehrated,- to grant bond for payment t 6 his,daugh ter, and her husband,. of 1051. per:annum, during their joint lives, under the penalty of 0501; The 'marri .ge ceremony was again p4rforrned, and the bond by. Mr. DiCkenson, the bankrupt, in tae our of .his daughter and her husband, was granted ; and some tirne.after this, but subsequent to the bank ruptcy of Mr. Dickenson, the father of the peti tioner, H. W. Hall, granted to his son an additional . annuity of 4001, on the narrative that such annuity was gi% en consideration of ' the bond granted by Mr. "Dickenson in favour of his daughter, the wife of the petitioner. On this bond it was 'now asked of the Lord Chancellor', that the petitioners might be allowed to prove before the Commissioner's, on Mr. Dickenson's separate estate. Mr.: in support of this application, contend ed that the bond now. sought to be claimed on, was not voluntary or gratuitous, but was granted, in two difftrent respects, for a valuable consideration. In the .first.viace, it was granted in consideration of the re-celebration, of the marrrage'between Mr. Hall, the younger, and his daughter, which to his (Mr. ,Dickenson's) mind, was not lawful or obligatory 3 but might, upon application to the proper Court, be dissolved—that the creditors of Mr. Dickenson too could not be injured at the time he granted the bond in question, by such an appropriation of part of 'his fortune; on:the contrary, that he might have been warranted in making a much larger provision for his daughter, was apparent from thiS circumstance, that .at this moment his separate estate was much more than sufficient to pay all his individual debts. But, secondly, if anything could he required to support the fad that this bond was not granted voluotarily, but for a consideration, it was not to be gathered from 'this circumstance, that the additional annuity granted by. Hall the eher to his son,_ proceeded on the narrative that it was .so granted in -consideration of this very bond ; so that,-to judge of the motives Which had dictated the conduct of the father of the young lady,. they had only to look to what the fa ther of the young Gentleman had done. The fist part of his case, the Learned Counsel admitted, must depend, on the estimation. in which his Lordship held Scotch marriages. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he entertained no &Wit that Scotch Marriages were very good. Mr. HART argued that that - Caurc was not accus tomed to hold them so. The *LORD CHANCELLOR said, if the settlement had been made 'by the order of the Court, that would have stipported it against the claims 'of any creditor': . i: was not stated that any positive, agreerrit - had'been made previous to the execration. of ttte fiund iti`gitestion It did, not appear 'thai'Mr. Dick'enetln'had grAnted the bOndlrorn airy obligation 'OH him' to do so. The annuity granted by the peti.: tiones . tatliei to him; was granted some time after the date of the bond ; so that, instead of the band being 'granted iti - CiinsidFration'of :the' an n u i t y , . O l e , annuity seemed' to have been grante'd in considera tion of the bond;_a circumstaoce which was at once destruotiire of the petitioner's claim on the bankrupt estate, an the ground of the bond riot being a vo luntary as on the' part Of the defendant. It, how ever, the...petit loner Could skew an agreem : ent existing antecedent to the date of the bond, that would do away the Citeuttistance . of the annuity by M. senior, to his son haVing been granted at a posterior hal by WILLIAM ARMIGER. SCRIPPS, - South Met/Cm Paper, issuer; tin the Editor Stc, (,aot-paia), sy date. The pet ir t ont wa!; a r a tvr , in atch 3 ma ncyer to induce a p erson to guess, teat by ao W" „s c 'it echivince him that this was the caw. It W 35, — 0 now appeared, a case that-affected the heart fo u more than it did the head. • - 11;d. Mr. HART said he s h ou ld i n q u i re, an d if he c° boo' procure affidavits to satisfy his Lordship, tit' 5 of -. e file them ; if not; hi s L ordship shoUld hear ii°ll'- • of the matter. or 4 Sir SAvuE t . R OMILLY sa id A , t , there would be - plus of Mr. Dickenson' s *separate estate; !V I it fora the petitioner- could have anv•claini 1. 7 1)" , Ahejoint creditors.of him and h; s piscrier n l3s ` , . aQ *Satistitd. The Lor.n CHANCEY:IIOR said, certainly. Mr. HART agr ee d that in th:s view of the ma tte ." in the event of his clients king unable to satis f Y ll4.4 Lordship on .the Point his Lordship had alluded t° ' they had no hope. Coamlures.lsom Es wo-'"l,:e3 : yesterday, at the Swan, in Doviu-street; Ploc3di": 11 : .I J before A. W the estmi ns t er Coroner, 'i `the body of Mrs..mmerson, the wife of a resr ct, ho able trade sman , i n U n i on -street, St. George`' was drowned in .tlic Serpentinedlivcr .morning. The deceased, it appeared in evid°3:i'' had been depressed . in spirits four - smite daYs , a-, ra the morning o f T ues d ay she lift her bed 'l) efo day-light, an d was f ound strugglirß in the SerP ell v , line at day-br ea t, by some labourers, going to w i ' r ; t ; The deceased h:id some signs of life about her, medical aid proved fruitless.—Verdi6t insanitY. Another inquisition was taken the receding (13 )'' before the same Coroner, on Alargaret Alurf. a f ''Lady's-maid t o Miss Clif zon, daughter to Lord Cu r zon. The suicide was committed at his LordshiV, house in Brook-street,•by t h e deceased suspeildill, herself by a handkerchief (torn a staircase. c had been sent to the town hbuse from 'Lord zon's country. house in a delirious state.—Ve ll ' i- Insanity. IDIPIDENDS. .Dec. 19. Thomas Frow, late of Mablethorpe. Lincoln, lilt" holder, at e l even , at t h e S aracen ' s Head Inn, Lincoln: le , IDee. , 2 - 1, • Benjamin Williams, • late of Liverpool. :':i 5 r,... draper, at eleven, the Star and Garter Tavern, I ' 36 ' street, Liverpool. ' • :Dec. ,7. john Christian Hart wig - Garbers, Li chant, at eleven, at the Star and Garter Tavern..P 2 '' street Liverpool. ,„1.-veli, Dec. 17. Elijah Cobham, LiVerpool, merchant,,,l o - . ' •at the Star and Garter ,Manchester p iturC4 ,Dec. 18. Isaac Newton cotton manuft at eleven, at the Star Inn, Manchester; Dco.T t. Samuel Kaikes Jackson Birmineum, - • maker, at eleven, at the ft:o'A. Hotel,- Birmingham- ~t ri ,, ;Dec. i i." Sampson ()oilman and William BanUi Po- - hatters, at ten, at Guildhall. • - , 7"•• ,' • .= • . CB R T/FICJITE3. • ert h-stre • Riewg,poye, late of the King's-Head, Monmouth' vianaller. verpooi , j a i , c el. . •ewei . ' limey 4 . lenaing, of Railway-street, • Otford.street, I . ler. ,Henry Canning, Pate of - Broad-street, tontion, merchant - lhornas Noakes, of Frith-street, Soho, pastry-cook , eit tienry Young, late of the :King' s.'•Arins, G"- eorge „r Brick-lane, vid ualler, Thomas Keyse and Ch ar l es P ratt W yatt, of Langbouni W,214 Chambers, London, merchants. George Egler, of Portsea, Southampton, millet, EA RTNERSn IPS Da S 0 LPL' n . Thomas =Page and William - Potts,. of jiattle, susi'rf,, drapers. I; ,Thomas Hinde,•of Li verpoo l , W illiam flinde, of r;101./••„ A , ' • near Lancaster, a nd J o h n Patchett of Burnley, Latlo' r- ' - • merchants. - •• ' ~ taiW i I Win Grey and Benjamin Wilkinson, of . 1, 4 1 F — Smithfield; groc e r s. i: 04 Christopher S c h o l es an d Thomas Ainsworth; of .131acloA Lancaster, cotton-inanutcturers. Samuel and Ar c hib a ld K ennet Hinton, of 'Gerrard-5- i iec 4 Soho, grocers. John Evans, Benjamin Davis, and Andrecv F raser, o f Laiv rence.lane, Cheap-side, ;gems. Florence Young and Thomas Wilkins; of College-grecfr, wha=t, Lambeth, timber-merchants. Jonathan Bastable and John Burge, cabinet-carvers. ft, John SymOn s an d Willi am Hicks, of Salmon and 1.3a1.e0u Bunhill.row, blacking. makers. :Henry .13anwell and Frederick Turner; of Chat chemists.. . , Isaac Aidebert and William Turner. il lames Ashburne r an d R o b ert. Hayes, of Liverpool, o•!' - " makers. John Steve nson an d l ames Bird, of Charing-Cross, ch.",.,,5v mongers- bgtto' r ' BIRThs. --- - On Sunday last, at Ellington Grove, Lincolnshire, the Lady of R. . ' S. Short, Esq. ot a Son. On 114th;ilay - last, 'at E xeter, t h e Lady of John Stevo ,sort , Esq. ofa Son and. Heir. On, Tuesday last, at Oxonheath, near Tunbridge, the Lady ot Sic William Geary, Ban, of a. Son and Licit., At his house in Portman-square, the Lady of the " W . Cowling, of a Daughter. MARRIBD. On .SaturdaY last, at M ary -le-bonne Church, W allop Brabazon, Esq. of the County of Louth, in Ireland, to Miss Crane; daughter of Mrs. Crane, of Park-street.: On the tBtl4 inst. at St. Mary -le-bonne, William P e Esq. of Trowbridge, Wilts, to Miss S. IY. Curntriins , Clieapside. On Monday, at Bath, William Augustus Dobbyri, to t accomplished Miss Maria Cornick. On Tuesday last, at Felstead, Essex, Richard Tatter , Esq. of Crosveilot- pl ace, to Miss Maty Grace, eldest daug' l ter of Mr. Horatio Robinson, of Piccadilly. or The same daY, at t h e 'D ev i zes. Mr. john Man wal i ng ,. Leominster, to . Mrs. j efferies, wid ow o f the late j. Esq. of that place. • Lately,..at Epyarrl, CharlesP (;reel" earson, jun. Esq., 0. tree?'' wick, Kent, t o Eli za, d aughte r of the late Colonel lo s Hill, of the Royal Artillery. On the t3th inst. at F a l mouth,lon her roam s- from - r am it,;„, the Lady of Lieutenant -Colonel Ceron, of the 79th gintent. the i7tti year -of her age, Louisa, eldest daughter of Sir ham Wake, Bart. On the 17th inst. the Rev. 1. W. Askew, A.M, Ee llow of University College, 'Oxford. arc% 'On Monday n i g h t last, a t his home in Doa o rs' carnal, 0 „ ; Henry Stevens, E sq. S on iO r Proctor, and Registrar 01. Arches Court of Canternary. The saine day, at 'Windsor,- . B. Parkhurst, Esq.On Tuesday,- at fail' paSt ftiNe o'clock i i i t h e atrcrnoon;„ , a bilious- fever, C Runnin)4ton, Esq. Barrister at , Lately, at Ewes Farm, in Yorkshire, Mr. Paul , l' ai- Farmeri Grazier, and l'sylaltster, ag e d ;b. PRICE U. .3 lOC 4: S Bank Stock, 245 Navy 5 per Cent. zoo i3l I rish 5 per Cent. • 4 pttr Lent: 3 per Cent. Red. /36 66 per Ct. Cons. 67 4* 663 67 Hank L. Ann. 17U 53.16tiis RDA If. India Stock, IS; i India Bonds, 265. P e r Excheq. Bills, 10. tos. r Otninuin, 4 g dis. - Hardt for Account, 245 - h for ayth 671 i - 67 ~.~~ , street, Gnrverc:r.tqua e t t be addrossod, n i ~~ts. " I ,tlyT, t;4.llexre s v, y rri ce " f ar -,he 1 Iv ith )11 4 ' f ew pev Mays 111 a tols, rtr be!li s i ~,~ ~-~. Ii! court _ s"u /Ca D;Ate'rirtv-t,estti: Att4 sol,l l qtk, 6,t; :r A ‘‘' 1 E tss.'"or, tte ' 4 14; 1 1:13 1 t (i „ u c K I t ' c " Dre,ellt Sii • ) r 'l\2 ta 1 - 7 rr';